Missing link between man and apes found

The new species of hominid, the evolutionary branch of primates that includes humans, is to be revealed when the two-million-year-old skeleton of
a child is unveiled this week. Scientists believe the almost-complete fossilised skeleton belonged to a previously-unknown type of early human
ancestor that may have been a intermediate stage as ape-men evolved into the first species of advanced humans, Homo habilis.

Adam was quite obviously a geneticist who managed to manipulate the DNA of modern man to make...A hairier, dumber modern man..?
Please mason, elaborate, how did Adam make BOTH man and ape?
Did he fancy a few gorillas in the jungle?

Why does it have to be an "either/or" choice between evolution and creation? I find it equally plausible that evolution is the means of creation and
the timeline was not measured by our current definition of years.

For the sake of argument, if the Old Testament were written by men why would it be necessary to explain every step of how man was created from dust
need explained in the books / scrolls, when the important aspect is that we and everything else "were" created from dust, star dust if you will?
Isn't that, in essence, what evolution seeks to explain: "how" we were created- the jump from simple molecules to complex life forms?

The great fallacy, in my opinion, is the confusion surrounding the definition of years. According to Relativity, time is experienced differently based
on the frame of reference. Is it not possible that to someone outside of the Universe, our evolution took place in ~6500 of their years, while
to us inside the expanding Universe, it took nearly 14 billion years?

Originally posted by abecedarian
Why does it have to be an "either/or" choice between evolution and creation? I find it equally plausible that evolution is the means of creation and
the timeline was not measured by our current definition of years.

For the sake of argument, if the Old Testament were written by men why would it be necessary to explain every step of how man was created from dust
need explained in the books / scrolls, when the important aspect is that we and everything else "were" created from dust, star dust if you will?
Isn't that, in essence, what evolution seeks to explain: "how" we were created- the jump from simple molecules to complex life forms?

The great fallacy, in my opinion, is the confusion surrounding the definition of years. According to Relativity, time is experienced differently based
on the frame of reference. Is it not possible that to someone outside of the Universe, our evolution took place in ~6500 of their years, while
to us inside the expanding Universe, it took nearly 14 billion years?

And for the record, I'm not religious. I just have an open mind.

That seems like a cop-out to me, and it isn't supported by any holy books.

Another interesting question would by why does the OT never give any helpful advice? Such as bacteria and viruses causing disease, it would have saved
billions.

If God had experienced our evolution in 6,500, why would he give US HIS time? why not tell us the correct time? Surely a God could do that? Unless
this god is a tad weak.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.